[Congressional Record: December 3, 2009 (Senate)] [Page S12323-S12333] STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Voinovich): S. 2834. A bill to amend the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 to establish a Security Clearance and Suitability Performance Accountability Council and for other purposes; to the Select Committee on Intelligence. Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I am introducing, along with my colleague Senator Voinovich, the Security Clearance Modernization and Reporting Act of 2009. Since 2005, our Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia has held a series of six oversight hearings on the serious shortfalls of the Federal Government's ability to effectively and efficiently issue security clearances to federal employees and contractors. This issue was placed on the Government Accountability Office's, GAO, High-Risk List in 2005. Since then, through the strong oversight of our Subcommittee and hard work of those in the government dedicated to reforming and modernizing the security clearance process, the tremendous backlog of security clearance investigations has all but vanished, and clearance determinations are made much more quickly. While progress has been made, we must use this opportunity to continue to push for fundamental changes to the clearance process to ensure that we do not experience the same problems in the future. In 2004, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, IRTPA, P.L. 108-458, required 90 percent of clearances to be completed within an average of 60 days by December 2009. At the time, it took almost a year to complete a Top Secret clearance request. IRTPA also required that agencies recognize clearance determinations made by other agencies to ensure reciprocity of clearances. An Executive Order was issued to implement these requirements, designating the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, as the agency responsible for setting security clearance policy and calling on the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, to conduct clearance investigations. Unfortunately, clearance timeliness continued to be unacceptably slow. After continued pressure from our Subcommittee and other stakeholders, in 2008, OMB brought together the Department of Defense, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI, and OPM to create a plan to overhaul and streamline the clearance process government-wide. At the recommendation of this reform team, a new executive order was issued creating a governance structure for overseeing and modernizing the federal government's security clearance and suitability processes. The members of the reform team were designated as the Suitability and Security Clearance Performance Accountability Council, PAC. Since the creation of the PAC and the implementation of some reforms, including enhanced application processes, new clearance standards, and plans for electronic adjudication and reevaluation, timeliness of clearances has greatly improved. Already, agencies are generally meeting goals laid out by the IRTPA. However, this has required tremendous effort and a surge in investigation capacity over several years to address backlogs. The bill that we are introducing today would address the lingering concerns over the clearance process and help sustain the momentum for reforming and modernizing the security clearance and suitability determination processes. First, to ensure accountability in security clearance reform and modernization, it is necessary to produce more detailed timeliness reporting. Today, OMB only reports the average timeliness of the 90 fastest percent of clearances. At our Subcommittee hearings, the GAO has repeatedly called for expanded reporting. It is important that we look at the timeliness of the whole process. Our legislation would require more complete reporting on timeliness for all clearances, not just the 90 percent that we see today. For the first time, it would require OMB to break down the numbers based on types of clearances and employee groups, and to report on which agencies are complying with reciprocal recognition of clearances. While the current IRTPA reporting requirements end in 2011, our legislation would extend these requirements to ensure that we receive reports until GAO has concluded this is no longer a high-risk issue. To ensure consistent leadership, our bill would codify the Performance Accountability Council, which has been the catalyst for much of the reform we have seen to date. It is critical that we codify the PAC as its future was in doubt during the presidential transition as the new administration reviewed previous executive orders. GAO has also urged the creation of new metrics that would measure not only the timeliness of clearance determinations, but also the quality and completeness of investigations. These metrics should be defined through the creation of a comprehensive strategic plan for clearance modernization. In response to GAO's recommendations, the legislation would require the PAC to create a comprehensive strategic plan. This plan would outline reform goals, establish performance measures, create a more robust communications strategy, define clear roles and responsibilities for stakeholders, and examine funding needs in order to keep reforms on track. Finally, this bill would require that the PAC undertake a more comprehensive information technology assessment than it has to date. Today, dozens of intertwined systems are used in the clearance process. These systems are a patchwork of outdated technology owned by different agencies. Rather than conducting an inventory of the current technology in use, as the PAC has already done, our bill would require a true needs assessment to define the most effective information technology approach. Our Subcommittee, under both my leadership and that of Senator Voinovich, has worked in a bipartisan manner on this issue seamlessly for several years and our oversight has yielded positive results. It is vital, from both a human capital perspective and a national security perspective, that security clearances and suitability determinations be of the highest quality and made in a timely manner. We must work to make sure this issue is removed from the High-Risk List as soon as possible. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record. [[Page S12331]] There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: S. 2834 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Security Clearance Modernization and Reporting Act of 2009''. SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. Subsection (a) of section 3001 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (50 U.S.C. 435b) is amended-- (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking ``In this section:'' and inserting ``Except as otherwise specifically provided, in this title:''; (2) by redesignating paragraph (1) as paragraph (2); (3) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (5); (4) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); (5) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (12); (6) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (10); (7) by redesignating paragraph (6) as paragraph (15); (8) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (14); (9) by redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (3); (10) by inserting before paragraph (2), as redesignated by paragraph (2), the following: ``(1) Adjudication.--The term `adjudication' means the evaluation of pertinent data in a background investigation and any other available information that is relevant and reliable to determine whether an individual is-- ``(A) suitable for Federal Government employment; ``(B) eligible for logical and physical access to federally controlled information systems; ``(C) eligible for physical access to federally controlled facilities; ``(D) eligible for access to classified information; ``(E) eligible to hold a sensitive position; or ``(F) fit to perform work for or on behalf of the Federal Government as a contractor employee.''; (11) by inserting after paragraph (5), as redesignated by paragraph (3), the following: ``(6) Classified information.--The term `classified information' means information that has been determined, pursuant to Executive Order 12958 (60 Fed. Reg. 19825) or a successor or predecessor order, or the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), to require protection against unauthorized disclosure. ``(7) Continuous evaluation.--The term `continuous evaluation' means a review of the background of an individual who has been determined to be eligible for access to classified information (including additional or new checks of commercial databases, Government databases, and other information lawfully available to security officials) at any time during the period of eligibility to determine whether that individual continues to meet the requirements for eligibility for access to classified information. ``(8) Contractor.--The term `contractor' means an expert or consultant, who is not subject to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, to an agency, an industrial or commercial contractor, licensee, certificate holder, or grantee of any agency, including all subcontractors, a personal services contractor, or any other category of person who performs work for or on behalf of an agency and who is not an employee of an agency. ``(9) Contractor employee fitness.--The term `contractor employee fitness' means fitness based on character and conduct for work for or on behalf of an agency as a contractor employee.''; (12) by inserting after paragraph (10), as redesignated by paragraph (6), the following: ``(11) Federally controlled facilities; federally controlled information systems.--The term `federally controlled facilities' and `federally controlled information systems' have the meanings prescribed in guidance pursuant to the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (title III of Public Law 107-347; 116 Stat. 2946), the amendments made by that Act, and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12, or any successor Directive.''; (13) by inserting after paragraph (12), as redesignated by paragraph (5), the following: ``(13) Logical access.--The term `logical access' means, with respect to federally controlled information systems, access other than occasional or intermittent access to federally controlled information systems.''; (14) by inserting after paragraph (15), as redesignated by paragraph (7), the following: ``(16) Physical access.--The term `physical access' means, with respect to federally controlled facilities, access other than occasional or intermittent access to federally controlled facilities. ``(17) Sensitive position.--The term `sensitive position' means any position designated as a sensitive position under Executive Order 10450 or any successor Executive Order. ``(18) Suitability.--The term `suitability' has the meaning of that term in part 731, of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations or any successor similar regulation.''. SEC. 3. SECURITY CLEARANCE AND SUITABILITY DETERMINATION REPORTING. (a) Extension of Reporting Requirements.--Paragraph (1) of section 3001(h) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (50 U.S.C. 435b(h)) is amended by striking ``through 2011,'' and inserting ``until the earlier of the date that is 2 years after the date that the Comptroller General of the United States has removed all items related to security clearances from the list maintained by the Comptroller General known as the High-Risk List or 2017,''. (b) Reports on Security Clearance Review Processes.-- Paragraph (2) of such section 3001(h) is amended-- (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as subparagraphs (E) and (F), respectively; and (2) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following: ``(A) a description of the full range of time required to complete initial clearance applications, including time required by each authorized investigative agency and each authorized adjudicative agency-- ``(i) to respond to requests for security clearances for individuals, including the periods required to initiate security clearance investigations, conduct security clearance investigations, deliver completed investigations to the requesting agency, adjudicate such requests, make final determinations on such requests, and notify individuals and individuals' employers of such determinations, from date of submission of the requests to the date of the ultimate disposition of the requests and notifications, disaggregated by the type of security clearance, including Secret, Top Secret, and Top Secret with Special Program Access, including sensitive compartmented information clearances-- ``(I) for civilian employees of the United States; ``(II) for members of the Armed Forces of the United States; and ``(III) for contractor employees; and ``(ii) to conduct investigations for suitability determinations for individuals from successful submission of applications to ultimate disposition of applications and notifications to the individuals-- ``(I) for civilian employees of the United States; ``(II) for members of the Armed Forces of the United States; and ``(III) for contractor employees; and ``(B) a listing of the agencies and departments of the United States that have established and utilize policies to accept all security clearance background investigations and determinations completed by an authorized investigative agency or authorized adjudicative agency; ``(C) a description of the progress in implementing the strategic plan referred to in section 3004; ``(D) a description of the progress made in implementing the information technology strategy referred to in section 3005;''. SEC. 4. SECURITY CLEARANCE AND SUITABILITY PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL. Title III of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (50 U.S.C. 435b et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``SEC. 3003. SECURITY CLEARANCE AND SUITABILITY PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY COUNCIL. ``(a) Establishment.--There is established a Security Clearance and Suitability Performance Accountability Council (hereinafter referred to as the `Council'). ``(b) Chair.-- ``(1) Designation.--The Deputy Director for Management, Office of Management and Budget, shall serve as Chair of the Council. ``(2) Authority.--The Chair of the Council shall have authority, direction, and control over the functions of the Council. ``(c) Vice Chair.--The Chair of the Council shall select a Vice Chair to act in the Chair's absence. ``(d) Membership.-- ``(1) In general.--The members of the Council shall include-- ``(A) the Chair of the Council; and ``(B) an appropriate senior officer from each of the following: ``(i) The Office of the Director of National Intelligence. ``(ii) The Department of Defense. ``(iii) The Office of Personnel Management. ``(2) Other members.--The Chair of the Council may designate appropriate employees of other agencies or departments of the United States as members of the Council. ``(e) Duties.--The Council shall-- ``(1) ensure alignment of suitability, security, and, as appropriate, contractor employee fitness, investigative, and adjudicative processes; ``(2) ensure alignment of investigative requirements for suitability determinations and security clearances to reduce duplication in investigations; ``(3) oversee the establishment of requirements for enterprise information technology; ``(4) oversee the development of techniques and tools, including information technology, for enhancing background investigations and eligibility determinations and ensure that such techniques and tools are utilized; ``(5) ensure that each agency and department of the United States establishes and utilizes policies for ensuring reciprocal recognition of clearances that allow access to classified information granted by all other agencies and departments; ``(6) ensure sharing of best practices among agencies and departments of the United States; [[Page S12332]] ``(7) hold each agency and department of the United States accountable for the implementation of suitability, security, and, as appropriate, contractor employee fitness processes and procedures; and ``(8) hold each agency and department of the United States accountable for recognizing clearances that allow access to classified information granted by all other agencies and departments of the United States. ``(f) Assignment of Duties.--The Chair may assign, in whole or in part, to the head of any agency or department of the United States, solely or jointly, any duty of the Council relating to-- ``(1) alignment and improvement of investigations and determinations of suitability; ``(2) determinations of contractor employee fitness; and ``(3) determinations of eligibility-- ``(A) for logical access to federally controlled information systems; ``(B) for physical access to federally controlled facilities; ``(C) for access to classified information; or ``(D) to hold a sensitive position.''. SEC. 5. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR REFORM. Title III of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (50 U.S.C. 435b et seq.), as amended by section 4, is further amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``SEC. 3004. SECURITY CLEARANCE AND SUITABILITY REFORM STRATEGIC PLAN. ``(a) Requirement for Plan.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of the Security Clearance Modernization and Reporting Act of 2009, the Security Clearance and Suitability Performance Accountability Council established in section 3003 shall develop a strategic plan that identifies the causes of problems with the issuance of security clearances and a description of actions to be taken to correct such problems. ``(b) Contents.--The plan required by subsection (a) shall include a description of-- ``(1) the clear mission and strategic goals of the plan; ``(2) performance measures to be used to determine the effectiveness of security clearance procedures, including measures for the quality of security clearance investigations and adjudications; ``(3) a formal communications strategy related to the issuance of security clearances; ``(4) the roles and responsibilities for agencies participating in security clearance reform efforts; and ``(5) the long-term funding requirements for security clearance reform efforts. ``(c) Submission to Congress.--The plan required by subsection (a) shall be submitted to the appropriate committees of Congress. ``(d) Government Accountability Office Review.--The plan required by subsection (a) shall be reviewed by the Comptroller General of the United States following its submission to the appropriate committees of Congress under subsection (c).''. SEC. 6. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY. Title III of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (50 U.S.C. 435b et seq.), as amended by sections 4 and 5, is further amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``SEC. 3005. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY. ``(a) Requirement for Strategy.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of the Security Clearance Modernization and Reporting Act of 2009, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress an information technology strategy that describes the plans to expedite investigative and adjudicative processes, verify standard information submitted as part of an application for a security clearance, and provide security clearance and suitability determination reform consistent with the strategy required by section 3004(a), by carrying out the Enterprise Information Technology Strategy referred to in the Report of the Joint Security and Suitability Reform Team, dated December 30, 2008. ``(b) Content.--The strategy required by subsection (a) shall include-- ``(1) a description of information technology required to request a security clearance or suitability investigation; ``(2) a description of information technology required to apply for a security clearance or suitability investigation; ``(3) a description of information technology systems needed to support such investigations; ``(4) a description of information technology required to transmit common machine readable investigation files to agencies for adjudication; ``(5) a description of information technology required to support agency adjudications of security clearance and suitability determinations; ``(6) a description of information technology required to support continuous evaluations; ``(7) a description of information technology required to implement a single repository containing all security clearance and suitability determinations of each agency and department of the United States that is accessible by each such agency and department in support of ensuring reciprocal recognition of access to classified information among such agencies and departments; ``(8) a description of the efforts of the Security Clearance and Suitability Performance Council established in section 3003, and each of the Department of Defense, the Office of Personnel Management, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to carry out the strategy submitted under subsection (a); ``(9) the plans of the agencies and departments of the United States to develop, implement, fund, and provide personnel to carry out the strategy submitted under subsection (a); ``(10) cost estimates to carry out the strategy submitted under subsection (a); and ``(11) a description of the schedule for carrying out the strategy submitted under subsection (a).''. SEC. 7. TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS. (1) Technical correction.--The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-458; 118 Stat. 3638) is amended by adding after the item relating to section 3001 the following: ``Sec. 3002. Security clearances; limitations.''. (2) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents in section 1(b) of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, as amended by paragraph (1), is further amended by adding after the item relating to section 3002, as added by such paragraph, the following: ``Sec. 3003. Security Clearance and Suitability Performance Accountability Council. ``Sec. 3004. Security clearance and suitability reform strategic plan. ``Sec. 3005. Information technology strategy.''. Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I rise today to join my good friend and Chairman on the Oversight of Government Management Subcommittee, Senator Akaka, to ensure that security clearance reform efforts begun in recent years continue by cosponsoring the Security Clearance Modernization and Reporting Act of 2009. Since the 1990s, the Government's Accountability Office, GAO, has documented problems with the Department of Defense's, DoD, personnel security clearance program, and in 2005 added the program to its high- risk list. DoD's personnel security clearance program has remained on the 2007 and 2009 high risk lists. In an effort to address this matter and improve the security clearance process, Congress set benchmarks for the time taken to issue clearances in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, IRTPA. IRTPA also required the President to select a single agency or office to oversee the security clearance process across the federal government and required uniform policies regarding the security clearance process, reciprocal recognition of security clearances among agencies, an evaluation of technology to expedite security clearance processes, and a plan to reduce the length of the security clearance process. While progress has been made to decrease the amount of time it takes to obtain a security clearance, more improvement is needed to fully reform the security clearance process, but reform efforts have been delayed this year by an interagency review of the security clearance reform initiatives undertaken over the past several years. To ensure that the good work begun with passage of IRTPA in 2004, I am pleased to cosponsor Senator Akaka's legislation that extends IRTPA's reporting requirements relating to security clearance reform efforts beyond their current 2011 expiration date and requires more details in those reports about the amount of time required by individual agencies to conduct both security clearance investigations and adjudications. To ensure that efforts begun over the past several years continue, the bill codifies portions of Executive Order 13467, which deals with reforming processes related to eligibility for access to classified information. The bill also calls for the development of the strategic plan GAO has been asking for since the DoD personnel security clearance program was put on its high risk list in 2005 and requires a more detailed information technology strategy relating to security clearance reform efforts. I am proud to cosponsor this bill and thank the Senator from Hawaii for his work on this legislation to address such an important issue. ______